Daniel Dennett's Breaking the Spell: An Unapologetic Apology

No metrics data to plot.

The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.

The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.

The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on
BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an
institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform
automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the
Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a
favorably uniform low price.

Proposals for a scientific study of religion have never been realised because, Daniel Dennett argues in Breaking the Spell, religion is surrounded by a spell that protects it from the critical inquiry characteristic of other academic fields of study. Dennett suggests two reasons for proposing such a study anew at this time. The first is political, namely, major policy decisions are currently being made on the basis of perceptions about religion; the second is theoretical, namely the establishment of an evolutionary psychology and of a cognitive science of religion which can provide the basis for such a study. Surprisingly, a number of those scholars in the field who are well-known for advocating precisely such a scientific study of religion have reacted negatively to Dennett's proposal. Do their very reactions confirm his thesis that an enchanting spell surrounding religion remains unbroken?